Mamita Karkara v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

BLAPL No.11016 of 2021 Mamita Karkara and another ....

Petitioners Mr. S.S. Ray-2, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and another ....

Opposite Party Mr. S.N. Das, ASC for State Mr.S.K. Dwibedi, Advocate for Informant

CORAM:

JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA

ORDER

24.01.2022 Order No.

01.

1.

This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing mode. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, State and Informant. Perused the relevant papers.

3.

This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the Petitioners for bail in connection with Tentulikhunti P.S. Case No.105 of 2021, corresponding to G.R. Case No.862 of 2021, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Nabarangpur, for commission of alleged offences under Sections 341/294/452/323/ 324/325/506/379/354/302/34 I.P.C.

4.

In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioners does not want to press this bail application in respect of Petitioner No.2. Accordingly, this bail application is confined to Petitioner No.1 only.

5.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner no.1 submits that Petitioner no.1 has been falsely entangled in the case due to previous enmity.

// 2 // 6.

Learned Standing Counsel for the State vehemently objected to the bail of the Petitioner No.1. However, he submits if the Petitioner no.1 is released on bail, stringent conditions may be imposed on the accused Petitioner no.1.

7.

Learned counsel for the Informant also submits that Petitioner No.1 has no nexus in the matter and he had no objection if she is released on bail.

8.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the period of detention of the Petitioner no.1 and the fact that Petitioner No.1 is a lady, it is directed that the Petitioner No.1 be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand) with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned court in seisin of the matter subject to conditions that the Petitioner no.1 shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not threaten the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever.

9.

Petitioner no.1 is also directed to appear before the local police station at an interval of every fifteen days between 11.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. on a working day once she comes out of jail custody. The court in seisin of the matter may impose any additional condition(s), if situation so warrants.

10.

With the above direction, the BLAPL is accordingly allowed.

11.

As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID -19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a print out of the order available in the High Court's website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned Advocate, in

// 3 // the manner prescribed vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court's Notice No.4798, dated 15th April, 2021 and Office Order dated 7th January, 2022. (A.K. Mohapatra) Judge U.K.Sahoo